God will sort them out.
The [Constitutional Sheriffs & Peace Officers Association] claims that county sheriffs are the supreme law of the land and their authority supersedes that of all others, even the president.
I went to high school in the Los Angeles Unified School District. As I recall (if I recall correctly), everyone had to take a semester of American Government. Prior to that, in junior high (San Diego Unified School District), we had Social Studies. I’m sure we had something similar in elementary school too. I grew up being taught that there are three branches of government, checks and balances, two houses of Congress, and so forth. I was taught that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and the President is the top executive of the branch that executes the laws. I’ve never heard that county sheriffs were the supreme law of the land (implying they’re above the Constitution).
I wonder… did they/do they not teach this stuff in the flyover states?
The corollary to this shitfest is that the people supporting this legislation are, in their own minds and souls, allowing the wholesale murder for hire of helpless babies and do literally nothing to save these innocents, because they’ll get in trouble if they intercede. They’ll talk and vote, but they won’t step in to save the life a baby unless they are indemnified against arrest.
During the Civil Rights Era, Black Americans did more than this to get a better seat on the bus.
I didn’t attend school in a flyover state, but my sense is that the American Government facts that we learned weren’t inaccurate, so much as un-nuanced. That is, we got the broad strokes, but less time and attention were spent on such things as situations in which the broad strokes looked like they didn’t apply. For instance, that a lot of the framework in our legal system evolved from Common Law (apparently significantly influenced by itself having developed within the framework of a feudal system of social order).
So, very likely, someone who learned that bare-bones fact discovered that at one time (and in some places), the Sheriff actually was empowered to administer the Law as he saw fit, with no practical recourse available to the poor schlub who the sheriff had taken a disliking to, and decided that this was the Natural Order of Things, and therefore the way American public servants should be compelled to behave (and would voluntarily behave, once the situation was explained to them). That someone then fed this syllogism to some folks who weren’t prospering to their own satisfaction under the real system we operate under, and the whole sorry mess grew larger and more convoluted.
I suspect they’re going for the more efficient process of shooting doctors who are about to perform an abortion. Although apprehending the women, convicting them of attempted murder, and then sentencing them to life in a for-profit prison would be more profitable.
This is the Police Department equivalent of the Sovereign Citizen movement. These “Constitutional Sheriff” guys have some bizarre reading of the law that they interpret in a way that lets them do whatever they want, the way the law intended!
Once again proving it’s not about saving the unborn, it’s about punishing their carriers. I think it’s about time NC had a Lysistrata moment. After all, should this pass a woman engaging in relations with a male is putting her life at risk.
I’ve always read Johnson County as Republican, but with a lot of Democrats. Wyandotte County on the other hand is Democratic. I do see that Biden got 53% of the JoCo votes in 2020, but I’m pretty sure that was a Trump backlash.
Yes, you are correct. GOP registration is higher than Democratic registration. My bad.
The House is going to vote on protections for same-sex and interracial marriages.
Why am I putting this in this thread? Because of this quote from a Republican Congressman:
Rep. Mike Johnson (R., La.) said that Democrats proposed the legislation so they could run ads in an election cycle. “This bill is just another superfluous exercise, this bill is completely unnecessary,” he said on the House floor.
If a Republican is trying very hard to tell you that something’s unnecessary, it’s very necessary.
I think the purpose is so that this will be a county that HAD a majority of Democratic voters before the Sherriff “fixed” that particular problem.
Pete Buttigieg testified before a House committee today, and one of them, I can’t remember who, asked him about why the government is advocating for electric vehicles when they cost over $50,000. Pete replied with, “I actually checked up on this before I came here,” and gave prices on several different models on EVs that were considerably cheaper than the price quoted. Troy Nehls then tried to give evidence of how Biden needs to be removed, including “He falls off bicycles”, and then asked Pete if he had talked to any other members of the Cabinet about invoking the 25th Amendment. Pete replied with, “I’m actually glad that we have a President who can ride a bike.” Then Nehls kept trying to talk over Pete, and the Chairman (I don’t know who it was) gaveled him down, and when Nehls said that the Chair owed him another minute, the Chair said, “If you had yielded to the Secretary to answer your ridiculous question, then you would have had more time.”
Senator Mike Braun says he misunderstood the question when he agreed that the right to interracial marriage should be left up to the states.
So Sen. Braum, are you resigning or not going to run for reelection due to inability to understand simple questions and general lack of understanding human beings?
Surely you must admit that there are many more qualified/educated/skilled persons in your state that would better represent it in DC.
Pete is awesome. Put him on a ticket with Katie porter and you have an amazing duo.
Meanwhile, Republicans in Pennsylvania are trying to get a law passed that deals with abortion (I don’t know the specifics and don’t care: it’s Republicans) that, they claim, actually changes nothing with respect to when an abortion can be performed or how abortions are accessible to people.
Left unanswered (and Malcom Kenyatta definitely asked) is why bother passing a law that changes nothing?
Nothing to see here, folks. Perfectly innocuous bill. Won’t affect anyone at all.
Surely you must admit that there are many more qualified/educated/skilled persons turnips in your state that would better represent it in DC.
FTFY
Just an amusing little anecdote here.
This weekend, we here in Olympia had our town fair/carnival for the first time since the beginning of the pandemic. One of the traditions of the fair is a friendly competition between the county Republican and Democratic parties, who set up booths next to each other and sell grilled onion burgers to raise funds for candidates for local office.
When I visited on Sunday, there was a huge crowd at the Democrats booth, and I had to wait in line for 10 minutes to place an order, and since there were 35 orders ahead of me I had to wait another half hour or so to get my burgers.
The Republican booth had no line whatsoever and I saw maybe five or six people walk up to order from it the whole time I was waiting.
It is undoubtedly a bill full of villainy, but it is just within the realm of possibility that they want to be able run on “we proposed a new abortion bill that the baby killing Democrats and RINOs killed”. The base that would vote for that wouldn’t notice that it didn’t change anything.
Let’s not forget the possibility of riders (amendments) to the bill. What nefarious stunts could there be!
IIRC they did this in New York in order to claim that Democrats supported abortion right up to the end of the third trimester. The bill they put forward didn’t do anything existing law didn’t cover but the language was toxic enough for the Democrats to block it. Then the Republicans used it as “proof” that the Democrats wanted to kill live babies.